Explicit and implicit approach vs. avoidance tendencies towards high vs. low calorie food cues in patients with anorexia nervosa and healthy controls

Paslakis, Georgios; Kühn, Simone; Schaubschläger, Anke; Schieber, Katharina; Röder, Kathrin; Rauh, Elisabeth; Erim, Yeşim

doi:10.1016/j.appet.2016.08.001

Cited by 56 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…More tentatively, both relevant feature and irrelevant feature versions of the task show some criterion validity in that AAT biases relate to higher state craving. Together, these results have the potential to open new avenues for applications of the AAT to relevant populations thought to be characterized by increased appetitive responding to food cues (e.g., food craving; Brockmeyer et al, 2015b), reduced appetitive responding (e.g., anorexia nervosa; Neimeijer, de Jong, & Roefs, 2015;Paslakis et al, 2016) or ambivalent responding (Hormes & Rozin, 2011; Rodríguez, Fernández, Cepeda-Benito, & Vila, 2005). It also poses crucial questions with regard to how AAT training protocols should be designed (Becker, Jostmann, Wiers, & Holland, 2015;Brockmeyer et al, 2015a;Kakoschke, Kemps, & Tiggemann, 2017;Wiers et al, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of food-related approach–avoidance biases: Larger biases when food stimuli are task relevant

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strong implicit responses to food have evolved to avoid energy depletion but contribute to overeating in today's affluent environments. The Approach-Avoidance Task (AAT) supposedly assesses implicit biases in response to food stimuli: Participants push pictures on a monitor "away" or pull them "near" with a joystick that controls a corresponding image zoom. One version of the task couples movement direction with image content-independent features, for example, pulling blue-framed images and pushing green-framed images regardless of content ('irrelevant feature version'). However, participants might selectively attend to this feature and ignore image content and, thus, such a task setup might underestimate existing biases. The present study tested this attention account by comparing two irrelevant feature versions of the task with either a more peripheral (image frame color: green vs. blue) or central (small circle vs. cross overlaid over the image content) image feature as response instruction to a 'relevant feature version', in which participants responded to the image content, thus making it impossible to ignore that content. Images of chocolate-containing foods and of objects were used, and several trait and state measures were acquired to validate the obtained biases. Results revealed a robust approach bias towards food only in the relevant feature condition. Interestingly, a positive correlation with state chocolate craving during the task was found when all three conditions were combined, indicative of criterion validity of all three versions. However, no correlations were found with trait chocolate craving. Results provide a strong case for the relevant feature version of the AAT for bias measurement. They also point to several methodological avenues for future research around selective attention in the irrelevant versions and task validity regarding trait vs. state variables.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of food-related approach–avoidance biases: Larger biases when food stimuli are task relevant

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the context of anxiety and addiction research it has been shown that positively-connoted cues were associated with an approach, and negative cues with an avoidance bias [ 32 ]. In a previous investigation, our group has shown that healthy controls displayed an approach bias for high- and low-calorie food cues; this bias was absent in the group of anorexia nervosa (AN) patients [ 33 ]. In a non-clinical cohort, Brockmeyer et al [ 34 ] applied a food approach-avoidance task and could show that high food cravers displayed a stronger automatic approach bias towards food than low food cravers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explicit and Implicit Approach vs. Avoidance Tendencies towards High vs. Low Calorie Food Cues in Patients with Obesity and Active Binge Eating Disorder

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients with binge eating disorder (BED) suffer from regular food binges with loss of control. This may be due to dysfunctional approach vs. avoidance tendencies towards food in BED. We applied an approach-avoidance task (AAT), in which n = 24 patients with obesity and active BED (OB-BED), n = 32 patients with obesity without current BED (OB), and n = 25 healthy controls (CO) either approached (“pulled”) or avoided (“pushed”) high (HC) vs. low calorie (LC) food pictures. We tested the hypothesis that OB-BED patients would show an approach bias (measured as different response times RT) towards HC food compared to the other groups. While there was no main effect for group or direction of movement, a significant main effect for calorie (p < 0.001; RT for HC significantly slower than for LC) was found. Repeated measures ANOVA (rm-ANOVA) for comparison of OB-BED vs. OB vs. CO revealed a significant three-fold interaction group × direction × calorie (p = 0.02). Against our hypothesis, the OB-BED group showed an avoidance bias for LC. In explicit ratings, OB-BED reported a significantly reduced urge to consume LC food compared to the OB group. Similar to OB-BED, CO also showed an avoidance bias for LC. The implications of our results are discussed and future directions in this field of research are presented.

show abstract

“…Although research is limited, one study found that individuals with BN did not differ from controls in consumption after food cue exposure (Nederkoorn, Smulders, Havermans, & Jansen, 2004), although another study found that people with BN report greater urge to binge and lower confidence to resist bingeing than controls (Staiger et al, 2000). In contrast, samples with AN tend to show avoidance biases to palatable food (Paslakis et al, 2016). However, it is unclear if these affective responses to palatable food cues translate to subsequent increased consumption after food cue exposure in experimental paradigms with ED groups.…”

Section: Introduction and Aimsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi‐method assessment of palatable food exposure in women with and without eating disorders

Christensen

French

Chen

2020

Euro Eating Disorders Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Eating disorders (EDs) are characterized by dysregulated responses to palatable food. Using a multi‐method approach, this study examined responses to palatable food exposure and subsequent ad libitum eating in women with binge‐eating disorder (BED: n = 64), anorexia nervosa (AN: n = 16), and bulimia nervosa (BN: n = 35) and 26 healthy controls (HCs). Method Participants were exposed to palatable food followed by an ad libitum eating opportunity. Affective and psychophysiological responses were measured before and during the task. Results Participants with EDs reported greater negative affect, particularly fear, following the food cue exposure, whereas HCs reported no change. BN and BED groups reported greater urge to binge after the food cue exposure, whereas AN and HC groups reported no change. Respiratory sinus arrhythmia levels, skin conductance and tonic skin conductance levels increased during food exposure for all groups. Across baseline and during the food exposure, the BED group had lower respiratory sinus arrhythmia levels relative to the BN and HC groups. The BED group consumed significantly more palatable food than the AN group. Conclusions ‘Palatable’ food stimuli elicited more negative affect, particularly fear, in individuals with EDs; and this, rather than psychophysiological responses, distinguishes individuals with EDs from those without.

show abstract

Explicit and implicit approach vs. avoidance tendencies towards high vs. low calorie food cues in patients with anorexia nervosa and healthy controls

Cited by 56 publications

References 36 publications

Measurement of food-related approach–avoidance biases: Larger biases when food stimuli are task relevant

Measurement of food-related approach–avoidance biases: Larger biases when food stimuli are task relevant

Explicit and Implicit Approach vs. Avoidance Tendencies towards High vs. Low Calorie Food Cues in Patients with Obesity and Active Binge Eating Disorder

Multi‐method assessment of palatable food exposure in women with and without eating disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About